Sunday, October 27, 2024

ShitBrit (shite return)

a/k/a the eternal returns of shite

John Harris, in this piece on the Return of Boys Wonder - gigging action at the 100 Club and a new compilation -  advances the thesis that they were BritPop avant la lettre:

"All this might suggest a lost classic from the mid-1990s, and the gaudy wonders of Britpop. But 'Goodbye Jimmy Dean' was actually by Boys Wonder, a visionary band whose star rose and fell between 1986 and 1988. They were about eight years ahead of their time, and in retrospect, their chronically awkward fit with their era was probably always going to be their undoing. But while they lasted, they were great. In 1987, I saw them performing on the Channel 4 comedy show Saturday Live, swaggeringly delivering another three-minute manifesto titled 'Shine on Me' I was smitten, but given their large-scale blanking by the music press (and the fact that the world wide web had yet to be invented), I was left wondering what on earth had happened to them."

Harris singles out as personally epochal the very TV performance that more than any other got me thinking about ShitBrit - I'd be obsessively rewatching this clip, wondering how on earth such obvious bollocks got so far (contrary to Harris, they did get a lot of music paper support)


That Ben Elton intro really adds savor to the shite, don't it!



Farce returns as history

"Some of their original stage outfits feature in Outlaws, a new exhibition centred on “fashion renegades of 80s London” at the capital’s Fashion and Textile Museum. But the main event is a brilliant new Boys Wonder anthology titled Question Everything, most of which has never been heard before."

The motley composition of the band - singer Ben Addison "and  his twin brother, Scott, were art-school alumni from south-east London, who cut their musical teeth as the drummer and bassist with a quartet called Brigandage (“the Sex Pistols with a female singer,” he says), in the vanguard of a short-lived genre known as Positive Punk....  guitarist Graham Jones, who was about to exit the wreckage of early 1980s pop sensations Haircut 100"  - highlights a thing I am fascinated by: the opportunism of bands. 

Sometimes the band sticks together and keeps it name but hops from style to style, across the unfolding of several pop eras. 

Sometimes the band will rename itself over this same process of changing with the times, adjusting to nomenclative fashions .

And then sometimes the bands keep disintegrating but the players reappear in new agglomerations with discards from other bands that didn't make it. The player will have adjusted their look and their playing style to whatever is happening, in hopes that this will finally propel them to fame. 

So many examples... I remember NME mocking Gary Tibbs in the early '80s with a slideshow of his changing looks in different bands - Vibrators, Roxy Music, Adam and the Ants (and subsequently several more). 

I suppose that fits more the journeyman, working-musician archetype perhaps. 

More telling is the makeovers done by prime movers who keep moving with the times. E.g. 

BritShit Emeritus Gareth Sager - The Pop Group, Rip Rig and Panic, Head. 

Or Bebop Deluxe / Red Noise / Bill Nelson in his synthpop phase.

Or Cafe Society / Tom Robinson Band / Sector 27 / Tom Robinson


Yet more proof here of the persistence and aesthetic flexibility of most musicians, with what came after the fizzle of Boys Wonder:

" By the mid-90s, the Addison twins had formed Corduroy, a quartet signed to the Acid Jazz label who retained a London-centric sense of place, but mixed it up with everything from 60s film soundtracks (their first two albums were largely instrumental) to Steely Dan." 

Their image is very different too:


Yes the chap with the glasses and goatee - and the receding hairline - I believe that is the formerly big-eyebrowed frontchap of Boys Wonder.






                                                The missing stink between James Taylor Quartet and the Propellerheads.

Looking good is fine, is a duty for bands, yes yes... but sometimes you wonder whether the BritShitters didn't overbalance their energy output towards clothes and hair rather than sound:

Ben would be sitting over in the corner with a pad and paper and he’d be drawing outfits. Our girlfriends were going to fashion college, so some of them could create the items of clothing that Ben was drawing.... “We would sit down together and watch the Who do My Generation on [1960’s US TV staple] The Smothers Brothers show,” says Addison. “The [Pistols’] God Save the Queen video. Untold Bowie stuff. Roxy, especially with the shoulder pads and Brian Eno’s feathers. Tom Jones when he was at his most gyratable, as it were. And pre-fat Elvis.

".... A visual breakthrough came with the Addisons’ bowl-contoured haircuts, which defied the 80s’ tyranny of quiffs. “A good friend of ours called Andrew McLaughlin was a rising star within Vidal Sassoon,” says Addison. “He turned up one night at the Greenwich theatre bar, which was one of our favourite hangouts, with this bleached, completely severe fringe, like Henry V. He looked like something out of black and white Doctor Who. I said, ‘Fucking hell, Andrew – that is the bomb. This is what we’re going to do.’” Ben combined his new barnet with eyebrows almost comically thickened with an eye-pencil, and instantly had his signature look."


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Last time the topic of ShitBrit came around, a correspondent asked me to talk candidly in subsequent posts (of which they weren't any, although I'd planned to) about the complicity of the music papers - specifically Melody Maker - in elevating all this shite, things like the New Wave of New Wave. Eyewitness accounts of editorial meetings etc. This is what I replied: 

I don’t know if I remember much about the editorial meetings and how things got to be covered

Most of the ShitBrit, there was either genuine enthusiasm from a writer (failings of taste on the part of journos is as much a generative cause of ShitBrit as it is on the audience level). 

Or the attitude was more ‘there’s a buzz about this band, we need to cover it’.  So someone would be dispatched to do that.  I’m not sure we had any actual Levellers fans, for instance, but they needed to be covered, was the thinking

In terms of scenes, Romo was definitely a manifesto looking for an actual movement of good bands, but it was a great manifesto – just a bit premature. If they’d done it around the time of electroclash they would have had a slightly more plausible set of candidates to do the rhetorical push around – if still not quite substance of the enduring kind.

It was certainly a lot better as a concept / rhetoric that the things NME was coming up with (Fraggle Rock, was that one?).

Kingmaker was given a big push by NME. As was Cud.  

MM was not unguilty in covering this type o’shite but it was not our core. I have no idea what those groups sound like – post-Wonderstuff?

New Wave of New Wave – did we start that? Or NME? Can’t remember but yes unadulterated shite. Wasn’t there a band called Snuff? They were probably solid enough, if boring. But SMASH and These Animal Men – typical Brit all mouth no trouser bizniz. 

Manics eventually worked up sufficient substance to pass muster, but lagged far behind their own rhetoric.  The Manics seem to have been some kind of intellectual / militancy lifeline for people a generation below me, especially those living out in the sticks…    the Manics interviews really were their great contribution, their art form (an extension of what Morrissey did, where it was a big part of his job – to be interviewed, to be a provocateur). With the total innovation of having Richie (and Nicky to lesser extent) as the specialized function of discourse – a division of labor, all the musical graft and stolid craftmanship in the singer and drummer, all the attitude (and book reading) in the other two.  

I think we are secretly fond of all this BritShit - it has that nostalgia power now. I almost regret living outside the UK during the second half of the ‘90s, it would have sharpened the blade of my fury even keener, because one would inevitably end up watching Jools Holland every week for want of nothing to do.... 

20 comments:

  1. Harris is not wrong about Boys Wonder as premature Britpop, is he? Goodbye Jimmy Dean could very easily have been the B-side to Parklife or Country House. Shine On Me could have been the one hit from some Britpop also-rans. Denim, maybe? With a woman singing, they could have been Sleeper

    “Shine” is a prescient word choice, too. Very Oasis.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Those genre-shifting performers are fascinating, I agree. My latest favourite discovery: Chris Cornell, who became a grunge superstar with Soundgarden, had a first band called Face to Face who looked like this:

    https://www.reddit.com/r/Soundgarden/s/OOyn81TaQr

    I have no idea what they sounded like, but going just on their style choices they might have been in the vicinity of late-period Genesis. Or blue-eyed soul, maybe?

    ReplyDelete
  3. If we're talking about unexpected/opportunistic style shifts, the best example is probably the Cars' prehistory as:
    - Milkwood, a 'Crosby, Stills and Nash-style folk rock band' (with Ocasek sporting a mustache on the LP cover)
    - Richard and the Rabbits, about whom little is known except that Jonathan Richman suggested the name
    - Cap'n Swing, a Steely Dan-style jazz-pop group

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is a good one.

      Possibly only rivalled - in terms of so much, varied Old Wave action before going New Wave with huge success - by Andy Summers's career

      Delete
  4. Are look/style shifts always bandwagon-jumping? That seems rather old-fashioned, as though there weren't any musicians equally excited by country rock in 1970, prog in 1973, punk in 1977 and synth-pop in 1981. 2024's music culture seems much less concerned with the idea that authenticity equals commitment to a particular genre (except for white people seen as culture vultures in hip-hop/R&B.)

    But it is funny to see the photos of punk luminaries dressed as hippies a few years earlier in one of John Robb's books.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah it is also probably genuine enthusiasm as well as wantin to keep the career going - or get it started, finally.

      And I have thought there is an element of pot calling the kettle, giving that critics go along with the changes just as much.

      It is fascinating the extent to which even already very successful bands modify their sound according to what's fashionable / what's selling. The Stones are a prime example -you wouldn't think they'd need to go disco, or slightly new Wave-ish. But they did. Possibly it was just going to discos socially, or a kind of sustained interest in black music syndrome.

      Then again there are plenty of examples of obdurately sticking-with-it. Like Sabbath never did anything modish, ever, right?

      Delete
    2. Not modish in the SOME GIRLS sense, but they did change in ways that looked hip to their audience: embracing prog on SABBATH, BLOODY SABBATH and SABOTAGE and switching up their sound with Dio in time for the NWOBHM.

      Delete
  5. My nomination for ShitBrit would be Transvision Vamp. I recall seeing one of their clips in the late 80s and - even as a lad hitting puberty - finding Wendy James insufficient to distract from the menial, lumbering mediocrity of their unimaginative pub rock. I mean there was plenty of music - from Phil Collins to Whitney Houston - that I didn't much like, but I always appreciated that there was genuine technique at the heart of their stuff; TV was the first major act I can recall thinking were actually *inept*.

    I recall an interview James did for the follow -up album a few years later (which their record company infamously refused to release in the UK) their comeback single had sunk at number 38 or whatever and she confessed she thought it would be top 5 - I felt really bad for her (oddly, their bassist would go on to find fortune - if little critical acclaim- as a member of corporate grunge outfit Bush).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They were ShitBrit, for sure. Never thought they were inept though - seemed musically fairly competently executed, which was not hard given the modest ambition. ShitBrit more for the "provocations". I think of them as a part of a genre of McLarenites. Alongside Sigue and the JAMMs.

      Then she got Elvis Costello to write a sort of concept album for her, about being a starlet.

      Delete
  6. How about Carter USM (potential ShitBrit/Clever Dick crossover)? They were *massive* with the NME in the early 90s (They seemed to get a cover story ever 6-8 weeks ...and were cover stars of the first NME I ever bought back in 91)- but immediately fell into disfavour when Suede came around. The weeklies could be cruel.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I suppose as much as I didn't care for Carter, I don't know if they were ShitBrit as such - ShitBrit is tied up for me with a shortfall, an all talk no trousers syndrome. Carter delivered - regardless of what you think of what they delivered.

      With true ShitBrit, there's a failure of execution as much as there is a failure of conception.

      As a result, ShitBrit more often than not fails in the marketplace - the punters aren't fooled.

      Delete
  7. "One constant of ShitBrit was how the record covers and band logos were as ugly as the band members"

    Broadly true - although as Simon notes the Manics certainly had the aesthetics down in the first few (ShitBrit) years.

    Shameless Smiths copyists Gene (as derivative a group as has ever existed), also presented well. Looking at Nothingelseon's twitter feed of old weeklies, I forgot how heavily they were pushed by the music press before Britpop exploded and rendered them irrelevant.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Here's a meta-ShitBrit suggestion: the charity single. The reason why I say it's ShitBrit (aside from the general lack of quality) is that it's only the UK that has a fresh splattering of charity singles every year. America just stuck with the godawful We are the World (with an updated version for the 2010 Haitian earthquake, which seems to have been involved with controversy over Wyclef Jean possibly misusing raised donations intended for earthquake victims). The UK, however, because of the multitude of national telephons, tosses off a few comedy-character-with-transient-popstar every year.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charity_record Look at the number of UK charity singles since 1990. Are there any aesthetically worthwhile forms

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes the charity single is a unique blight. It's a different kind of shite though. Showbiz shite.

      Yet another category - the novelty single.

      And overlapping but also distinct - the comedian who makes a record genre. Not always shite - Charlie Drake's "Puckwudgie" ! - but mostly shite.

      And again, another category - soap opera stars making a single.

      Delete
    2. I think of ShitBrit as I've been blogging it as very much bound up with the weekly music press.

      There could be another kind that is actually bound-up with the style bibles - Face, iD, Blitz. The kind of St Martin's etc clothes horses that would get a photo-led one page feature in the Face. Haysee Fantazee would be the archetype (although I kind of enjoy them). Another would be Stimulin, who actually had someone who worked at iD (maybe later on) as their singer. Perry Haynes of "What's Funk" fame. They would be in the weekly music papers too but they are archetypally style bible. See also Swann's Way and Carmel.

      Delete
    3. I fell asleep whilst writing my post, to explain the abrupt

      Delete
    4. I understand your distinction. I understand that this blog isn't the place to discuss Hale and Dave's Stonk. But in terms of sheer archaeology, it's worthy of comment.

      We should remember that Monty Python's albums are considered a valuable example of their oeuvre. And Kylie has been a critical darling for decades (Martine McCuteon (check spelling) has a successful career as a West-end diva).

      Delete
    5. Christ, autocorrect turned Hale and Pace to Hale and Dave. And my spelling of dear Martine's surname didn't attempt to be correct.

      Delete
  9. Gene are Landfill Indie rather than ShitBrit, I would proffer.

    Landfill Indie's aesthetics are usually very good. (I actually quite like a lot of LI, a guilty pleasure.)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwfFFM-d6wk This was 1991's Comic Relief single, The Stonk, by Hale and Pace and the Stonkers. Here's the Wikipedia entry for the personnel involved:

      In 1991 Hale & Pace were part of a charity supergroup, who released a single in aid of Comic Relief.[3] Credited to Hale & Pace and the Stonkers,[17] the record, called "The Stonk", was based on a fictitious dance craze and was co-written by the two comedians along with Joe Griffiths. The single was produced by Queen guitarist Brian May, who was also featured on the track and had his name printed on the front cover.[18][19] Other musicians performing on the single, besides Brian May playing keyboards and guitar, were Nick Lowe, David Gilmour and Tony Iommi on guitar, with Neil Murray on bass guitar. Cozy Powell, Roger Taylor and Rowan Atkinson – appearing as his character Mr. Bean – performed on drums.[3] Joe Griffiths and Mike Moran contributed on keyboard.[19]

      (When I was 7, I loved this, considering it fun and effervescent. Now I am 40, I don't. But it was for charity.)

      Delete

Very Hyperstitious

  A Mark Fisher, CCRU fan lurking on staff at my local library?